The Senate gave final passage to a bill Tuesday that will allow undocumented immigrants pay in-state tuition at Connecticut colleges and universities.
Sen. Beth Bye, D-West Hartford said the bill has a strict threshold compared to states that have already implemented similar legislation and requires undocumented students to attend a Connecticut high school for four years and sign an affidavit stating they are seeking citizenship before receiving in-state tuition.
And unlike four years ago when a similar bill was vetoed by then Gov. M. Jodi Rell, Gov. Dannel P. Malloy said he will sign the legislation.
“This is something that ran on,” Malloy said Tuesday. “I believe that if you have Connecticut high school diploma you should be able to attend a Connecticut public institution at state rates, pretty straightforward.”
A HUGE round of thanks goes out to the students and faculty at Western Connecticut State University who lobbied endlessly for the bill. I had the pleasure to meet several of the "CTDreamers" while following this story over the years and without their efforts, this bill that provides in-state tuition for undocumented immigrants would not be a reality.
Here's video footage of the CTDream rally in New Haven:
...and from the CTDream Act forum at Western Connecticut State University, here's my interview with Carolina and Camilla Bortolleto and Lorella Praeli.
04.25.22 (RADIO): WSHU Latino group call on Connecticut lawmakers to open a Danbury charter school
06.03.22 (OP-ED): KUSHNER: "Career Academy ‘a great deal for Danbury"
On September 26, 2007, ten plaintiffs filed suit in response to an arrest of aday laborers at a public park in Danbury, Connecticut. Plaintiffs amended their complaint on November 26, 2007.
The amended complaint states that plaintiffs sought to remedy the continued discriminatory and unauthorized enforcement of federal immigration laws against the Latino residents of the City of Danbury by Danbury's mayor and its police department.
Plaintiffs allege that the arrests violated their Fourth Amendment rights and the Connecticut Constitution because defendants conducted the arrests without valid warrants, in the absence of exigent circumstances, and without probable cause to believe that plaintiffs were engaged in unlawful activity. In addition, plaintiffs allege that defendants improperly stopped, detained, investigated, searched and arrested plaintiffs. Plaintiffs also allege that defendants violated their Fourteenth Amendment rights when they intentionally targeted plaintiffs, and arrested and detained them on the basis of their race, ethnicity and perceived national origin. Plaintiffs raise First Amendment, Due Process and tort claims.
Plaintiffs request declaratory relief, damages and attorneys fees.